Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

Petitioner challenged the legality and validity of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to proceed on the basis that the writ applicants had not obtained the necessary permission from the Development Commissioner to manufacture goods for export

Demand — Section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017— The petitioner a 100% EOU, engaged in the business of manufacturing excisable goods like Beta Blue etc., challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 10/06/2019 passed by the respondent, wherein demand was confirmed alongwith interest and penalty under section 11 of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with section 174 of CGST Act, 2017. It was revealed in the audit by CERA that the applicant had sold Beta Blue in DTA by wrongly availing the benefits of the concessional rate duties under the Notification No. 23/2003-C. E. Dated 31/3/2003. The petitioner is guilty of availing benefits of concessional rate of duty without any prior permission of the Development Commissioner, KASEZ, Gandhinagar. The petitioner submitted that the permission was granted by the Development Commissioner dated 3/3/2004 and has been extended from time to time.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court by interim order grant relief and issued Notice returnable on 16.10.2019.—Messrs Asahi Songwon Colors Ltd. Vs Union of India [2019] 14 TAXLOK.COM 115 (Gujarat)